For two years, I walked around town and asked rabbis, if Torah is everything, why do we daven so much?
Here's the silliest response: your question isn't why we daven so much, it's why you don't learn more Torah. You should learn 4 hours a day.
You'll note, he mocked my question, saying it wasn't a question, which is serious mockery, and then he made assumptions about how much I learn - negative of course - and then he made a requirement that for a New York baal habayis is ridiculous. He never said anything nice about davening, just more praise for Torah. I would grade the response as an F.
Here's another response: most of davening is Torah. Once again, turning everything into Torah. What's good about davening, is that it's Torah. I'll note, this response was given pleasantly. His manner wasn't the disappointing part. The disappointing part was the this man was supposed to be a massive talmid chocham, truly famous for this knowledge. In fact, he had been introduced to the audience with the instructions, you can ask him anything. This was a Charedi yeshivish type. A son-in-law of a very famous gadol. He has now passed on.
A third guy was dismissive. I approached him at a bris and they were about to start the brochos, and he had about 3 seconds for me. He said something about, it's all one, meaning Torah and davening are connected. That's fine, but really it needs a little elaboration because we are told Torah is everything, so how can they be one? (Same guy didn't have time for me at his Shabbos table either, so it wasn't a matter of the brochos starting. And besides he could have said, hold on one minute, and then talked to me after.) This is a Rosh Yeshiva at RIETS. You'd think he'd have some familiarity with questions like this.
So here's what any of them might have said. Shlomo said, the sum of the matter is to fear Hashem and keep His commandments. (Koheles 12:13) Tefillah helps us acquire yiras Hashem and is a commandment. As for Torah being everything, obviously, it isn't. The Vilna Gaon said, the purpose of Torah is commandments. And the purpose of life is to fix one's middos. (Even Shelaimah,chapter one)
So how is it, that none of these people managed to quote either Koheles or Even Shelaimah?
Here's another answer from the Iggeret HaKodesh, middle of
Epistle 7 of the Tanya
At this point
the Alter Rebbe resumes the thought begun earlier, where it was pointed out
that Jacob referred to G‑d as “E‑l, G‑d of Israel,” for the soul of
Jacob (otherwise known as Israel) was illumined with all the aspects of the
Divine radiance, just as was the soul of Adam.
והנה שופריה דיעקב
מעין שופריה דאדם הראשון
Now “The consummate
beauty of Jacob resembles the consummate beauty of Adam,”1
שתיקן חטא אדם
הראשון
for he rectified the sin
of Adam.2
והיתה נשמתו גם כן
כלולה מכל הנשמות שבישראל, מעולם עד עולם
His soul, too, comprised
all the souls of Israel, “from world to world,” i.e.,
both those of the “Revealed World” as well as the “Concealed World.”
והיה מרכבה לתורה
שלמעלה, שנקראת בשם אדם
Moreover, he was a
vehicle for the Torah in its heavenly state, which is referred to as Adam,
This phrase
reflects the wording of a verse which begins with the words,3 זאת התורה
אדם... — “This is the law: A man...” Interpreted on the level of derush,
these words have been taken literally to mean: “This is the Torah — Adam.”
כמו שכתוב: ועל
דמות הכסא דמות כמראה אדם וגו׳
as it is written,4 “And on the likeness of the throne
there was a likeness as the appearance of Adam” [lit.,
“of a man”], and the latter term, as is explained in the Kabbalah,5 refers to the Torah.
וכמו שכתוב: וזאת
לפנים בישראל גו׳
It is likewise written:6 “And this (זאת) was the custom in former time in Israel...,”
That, at
least, is the plain meaning of the phrase quoted. On the interpretative level
of derush, however, each of the three Hebrew words is here construed
as follows: זאת (as taught in the Zohar) connotes
“Torah”; לפנים — “within”; בישראל
— “in Israel the Patriarch.” At this level, the quoted phrase thus means that
“the Torah is [implanted] within, in Israel the Patriarch.”
אין זאת אלא תורה
and “זאת refers only to the Torah.”7
שהיתה כלולה
ומלובשת בנשמת ישראל סבא, הכלולה מכל הנשמות
For the Torah was
contained and vested within the soul of “Israel the Patriarch,” which
compounded all the souls. (The quoted phrase refers
both to Jacob in the mortal world and to his Supernal source, which is also
known by this name.)
Now in
addition, Jacob, or “Israel the Patriarch,” was a vessel capable of receiving
the radiance of the Torah. Hence:
וזהו: ויקרא לו אל
אלקי ישראל
This is the meaning [of
the above-quoted phrase], “And he called Him E‑l, G‑d of Israel”:
אל: לשון המשכת
הארה מאור אין סוף ברוך הוא מההעלם אל הגילוי
Since
the Name E‑l denotes the Divine attribute of Chesed,
which finds expression in G‑d’s desire to communicate His hidden light, [Jacob’s use of] the
Name E‑l signifies [man’s] calling forth the radiation from the
[infinite] Ein Sof-light, which is clothed in the
Torah, from concealment to manifestation,
להאיר בבחינת גילוי
בנשמתו
so that it should
illumine manifestly in man’s soul.
וכמו שכתוב: אל
הויה ויאר לנו
Thus, too, it is written:8 “E‑l is the L‑rd, and He
has given us light,” indicating likewise that the Divine Name E‑l
connotes illumination.
Thus, when we
say that Jacob called G‑d “E‑l,” we imply that he called forth and
drew down into his soul an all-encom-passing revelation of the [infinite] Ein
Sof-light that comprises all the particular details of the Torah and
its mitzvot.
ואחריו כל ישרי לב,
העוסקים בתורה ובמצות, מאיר אור ה׳ אין סוף ברוך הוא בבחינת גילוי בנשמתם
and after [Jacob], the
[infinite] Ein Sof-light shines openly into the souls of all
the upright of heart who engage in the Torah and the mitzvot.
“The
upright of heart”9
alludes to those individuals within whom the G‑dly illumination found in the
intellect descends to the heart, where it inspires them with a love and an awe
of G‑d. These spiritual emotions in turn add vitality to their study of Torah
and their performance of the mitzvot.
The Divine
radiation felt by these individuals is termed “our portion” (חלקנו, as in the quotation with which this epistle opened). This is
the particular G‑dly illumination which permeates a Jew’s soul through his
performance of each and every commandment, and which is a portion and part of
the all-encompassing illumination comprising 613 “parts”.
וזמן גילוי זה ביתר
שאת ויתר עז, ההארה במוחם ולבם
The most elevating and
most powerful10
manifestation of this [Divine] radiance in their mind and heart
הוא בשעת התפלה,
כמו שכתוב במקום אחר
occurs at the time of
prayer, as is explained else-where.11
It is by
means of the ladder of prayer that all of a man’s mitzvot ascend; this
same ladder also serves as the conduit through which the resultant Divine
radiance and revelation descend to this world.
So why don't they know about koheles, even shelaimah or the igeres of the Tanya? I think the answer is that they are practicing Manalism. They reduced the entire Torah to one mitzvah, learning, which happens to be the way all of these people obtain their parnassah and their cavod. And they reduce Torah to abstractions on a few pages of a few mesechtas.
Ironically, the essence of that mitzvah is teaching others. Rabbi Yonasan Gefen has a lovely vort on that. He gives these away so I am going to post the entire thing here with contact info to order more from him.
PINCHAS - WHY
HASHEM CHOSE YEHOSHUA by Yehonasan Gefen
Towards the end of
the Parsha, there is the account of Moshe Rabbeinu ‘s request that Hashem appoint an
able successor to lead the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael. Hashem answered
him that his faithful student, Yehoshua, is the appropriate choice. Chazal elaborate on the dialogue that took
place between Hashem and Moshe. They
tell us that Moshe asked that his own sons succeed him as leader, however
Hashem refused this request, because “your sons sat and were not osek beTorah” , whereas,
Yehoshua was the rightful successor because “he would come early to, and leave
late from, your beis medrash, and would arrange the benches and cover the
tables[1].” There are two difficulties with this
Medrash; Firstly, if Moshe’s sons were not osek
b’Torah
then how could Moshe Rabbeinu have had any expectation that they could lead the
Jewish people[2]? Secondly, it would seem that Hashem was
comparing Moshe’s
sons to Yehoshua in the same area of hanhago - that of being osek b’Torah. However, when Hashem praised Yehoshua he
stressed the fact that he set up the Beis Medrash - this does not seem
to have any relevance to being osek beTorah. What exactly was the nature of the comparison of Moshe’s sons to Yehoshua?
Rav Yosef Shalom
Elyashiv Shlita explains that Moshe’s sons were talmidei chachamim and they
were learned enough to lead the Jewish people - that is why Moshe believed that
they were fitting candidates for succeeding him. However, Hashem replied that this was not
sufficient; when He said that they “sat and were not ’osek b’Torah’”
He meant that they sat and learned for themselves
and were not osek with others in Torah.
In contrast to their lack of being involved in helping other people’s Torah, Yehoshua
would set up the Beis Medrash and thereby enable others to learn Torah - that
is considered being ‘osek
b’Torah’[3].
There are a number of
important lessons that can be derived from Rav Elyashiv’s explanation[4],
however, there seems to be one specific difficulty with it - it would have
seemed that being osek b’Torah only implies
learning Torah for oneself, where is the allusion to enabling others to learn
Torah? In order to answer this it is
necessary to understand the basic definition to the mitzva of Talmud
Torah. The Rambam writes that
there are two sources for the mitzva; “You shall teach
them to your children” and “you shall teach them sharply to your children.”. From these commands to teach children the
Rambam derives that a person must learn Torah - the fundamental reason given
for learning Torah is so that one can teach it to his children. We see from here that the mitzva of ‘Talmud Torah’ refers to teaching
as much as to learning. Moreover, the
Rambam brings the Chazal that ‘children’ also refers to students, and that a fundamental
part of the mitzva is to teach people even if they are not one’s own children[5]. Thus, it is quite understandable that Rav
Elyashiv can translate, being ‘osek b’Torah’
as meaning ‘causing others to learn’ Torah.
Another source for
the concept that ’Torah’ intrinsically
involves enabling others to learn Torah is found in the Gemara in Avoda Zara[6]. The Gemara says that world history is split
into three periods of two thousand years:
The first is called the ‘two thousand years of nothingness’, the second period is known as the ‘two thousand years of
Torah.’ The commentaries explain that the years of
nothingness are so called because of the lack of Torah in the world during that
time, whereas the years of Torah mark the beginning of Torah’s presence in the
world. The Gemara says that the years of
Torah began with the time that Avraham began teaching Torah to the world, as
represented by the ‘souls
that they made in Charan’. However,
there is a difficulty with saying that the years of Torah began only at this
point in time. There are many maamarei
Chazal which clearly state that there were great people who lived before
Avraham and learned Torah,[7]
and yet they lived in a time that is described as being absent of Torah,
moreover Avraham Avinu himself learnt Torah long before he began teaching
others - the era of ‘Torah’ only began with the ‘souls that they[8]
made in Charan[9]’. - why is this the
case? Rav Zev Leff Shlita explains that
Avraham Avinu did something more than his illustrious predecessors - he taught
Torah. The era of ’Torah” only begins when
Torah is taught as well as learnt[10].
The Maharsha makes a
comment that develops this theme further by showing that, in addition to
regular ’learning’ of Torah even the
concept of ‘Ameilus
b’Torah’ is intrinsically
bound up with teaching Torah. The Gemara[11]
derives the importance of ‘ameilus b’Torah’
from various passukim in Tanach that mention the
word, “l’amal’[12]’
(to toil).
The Maharsha writes that the letters of ‘l’amal’
(lamed, ayin, mem and lamed) make an
acronym of ‘lilmod
al menas lelamed.’[13]
We have seen many
sources that show that learning and teaching Torah are in the same category. It still needs to be explained why teaching
Torah is so fundamental in Jewish thought.
The Ben Ish Chai zt’l provides us with a deeper understanding of this
inyan. He brings the Gemara in
Sanhedrin[14]
that quotes the passuk in Shelach saying that person who serves other gods has “degraded the word of
Hashem[15].” The Gemara then describes other modes of
behavior that deserve this devastating indictment[16]. Surprisingly, the Gemara adds that the passuk
includes “one
who learns and does not teach.” The Ben
Ish Chai asks why the Gemara speaks so harshly about one who learns but does
not teach. H ae explains that the Torah
is eternal and its eternal nature is preserved by passing on its teachings to
the next generation. However, he writes
that “a
person who learns but does not burden himself to teach his fellow damages the
eternal nature of the Torah because the Torah that he learns cannot move on to
the next generation…therefore
it is understood why Chazal describe this man in such a severe manner - because
he prevents the chain of the passing down of Torah from generation to
generation and nullifies the Torah’s eternal quality..[17]”
This also helps us
understand why it was important that the leader of the Jewish people be one who
causes others to learn Torah - his role was to preserve and continue the mesora
and thereby preserve the eternal nature of the Torah. We have seen how intrinsic teaching Torah is
to the mitzva of learning Torah.
Moroever, whilst teaching Torah is a great chesed to other people, it is
also clear that there is a very significant element of bein adam le’utsmo in
teaching Torah - it helps develop our appreciation of the eternal nature of
Torah and to play a role in passing it on to the next generation.
[1]
Bamidbar Rabbah, 21:14.
[2]
This question is asked by Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv Shlita, Divrei
Aggada, p.319.
[4]
See his continuation in Divrei Aggada, p.319-20 where he elaborates on
the necessity to share one’s Torah with those who are distant from the true
path. We also learn from his explanation
that the ability and willingness to share Torah with others is a key trait in
determining an effective leader.
[5]
The Mishna in Avos, 1:1 tells us that we must “establish many
students.” The Tiferes Yisroel writes
that it is not enough to merely teach one’s own children but one must teach
other Jews as well.
[7]
Chazal say that Adam HaRishon, Noach and Shem v’Ever learnt Torah.
[8]
‘They’ refers to Avraham and Sarah.
[9]
Avraham was 52 years old when the era of Torah began - see Rashi, Avoda
Zara, 9a.
[10]
One may ask that Avraham was not the first to teach Torah - Shem and
Ever had yeshivas where they taught students. See Rambam, Hilchos Avoda Zara, Ch.1 Halacha
3, with Raavad and Kesef Misha, Shut Chasam Sofer, hakdamo to Yoreh Deah, and
Chomas Hadas of the Chofetz Chaim who all deal with this issue.
[12]
See Iyov, 5:7. Mishlei, Ch.16.
[13]
Maharsha, Sanhedrin, 99b.
[16]
Included in this list are one who is megaleh panim b’Torah and
one who claims that the Torah is not from heaven.
[17]
Benyahu, Sanhedrin, 99a, quoted in ‘Peninei Ben Ish Chai, Shelach, p212.
To get weekly Torah insights from Rabbi Gefen write here: yehonasan@rabbigefen.com
So if they are doing such a poor job of teaching, are they even learning? I think what they are doing is a big pile of yeshus. It's all me-ism. Maybe not all, but it's drenched in that.
And if they are learning such a small sliver of Torah, are they even learning? The Talmud (Kiddushin 30a) says, “To what extent is a person obligated to teach his son Torah? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: (One should emulate the education of) for example, Zevulun ben Dan, whose father’s father taught him Bible, Mishna, Talmud, halakhot, and aggadot.” The Vilna Gaon said “One must first fill himself with knowledge of Tanach, Mishna, Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds, Tosefta, Mechilta, Sifrem and all other baraisos. Then he should discuss and debate his learning with his colleagues. By studying in this sequence, one attains the splendor of Torah. One who changes this arrangement, however, and studies how to debate before knowing one Mishnah openly, will forfeit even the little Torah he heard in his youth.” (Even Shelaimah 8:2)
They aren't learning much, they aren't teaching, they aren't doing much chesed. What are they? It's nebach.
